Bailey v. Kraus

Seabury, J. (dissenting).

I dissent. The answer was clearly insufficient to admit proof of the defendant’s discharge in bankruptcy, as appears from the authorities referred to in the opinion of Mr. Justice McCarthy. I think under the circumstances that the ruling of the trial justice was correct in refusing to permit the amendment which the defendant asked leave to make. The proposed amendment would not, under the authorities cited in the prevailing opinion, be sufficient to entitle him to prove his discharge. This case has been pending since January, 1900, and in June, 1901, was before the…